Monday, August 29, 2011

When I learned ITIL and COBIT, I read a lot about IT governance. What I learned, it was not governance, but management. Until now, there is no clear framework about IT governance. Even in ITIL and COBIT 5. My argumentation is supported by this statement:

I think the reality is that all of what both ITIL and COBIT 5 call "governance" is in fact "management" and that neither framework demonstrates any comprehension of the role of those who are in the true governance role - the board of directors.

Because neither recognises the true governance role, they also miss the opportunity to understand the concept of the "system of governance" which is central to the overall definition for corporate governance as popularised by Cadbury. The system of governance has a deep symbiotic dependence on the system of management and the machinery for effective governance often extends deeply into the management systems.

Having discussed this with the chief of one of the local university business schools recently, I am more convinced that there is a significant gap in academic understanding here and a field that deserves more research.

Sometimes, we have a problem to differentiate between governance and management, especially in IT aspect. However, there is a discussion about this in a group. I think this is one the best explanation to differentiate between governance and management.

IT Governance is a global challenge but. IT governance must be an integral part of corporate governance.

IT people and industry in general, make IT sound complex and scare people from corporate governance away. They just leave IT behind as they think its all too complex and things they wont understand.

IT governance should ensures that IT goals are met and IT risks are mitigated such that IT delivers value to sustain and grow the organization.

Now because IT management is mostly 'governing' itself. That is where the problems start. IT management always claim everything is fine and all projects are going great.

Because of lack (or at least the wrong usage) of performance matrices - there is little or no strategic alignment between IT investment and actual delivery.

Introduction

Some years ago, I developed my new blog with this old address (rudymh.blogspot.com), after some years configuring my first website address at rudymh.8m.com. One day I felt this old address seemed too egocentric. Then, I started to change this address to the new one, i.e. pojokgagasan.blogspot.com, which is supported by Blogger's technology. Thanks to Blogger's team.

Surprisingly, one day, when I was researching the internet, I found that my old blog address had been referring by some website with the internet link directly to this my old blog, like http://lpse.blogdetik.com/. As some people may know, I have been sharing my knowledge in developing e-Audit module for Indonesia e-Procurement system, which we call it Layanan Pengadaan Secara Elektronik (LPSE). I didn't want they felt disappointed because the link was broken. And then I reactivated this address again to serve them. But, know I will share not only for them, but also for the general people.

Now I'm thinking that this address will be used for putting my general idea in improving Indonesia, and on the other side the address at pojokgagasan.blogspot.com will be used to capture my idea in improving information technology implementation and fighting corruption.

When we have a blog, we felt very touched when the blog was accessed by many people and gave benefit to them. That is why only you who can judge if this blog really gives benefit to the people. I'm just putting my idea in improving the country, to make it better, so our country could be more competitive and wealthy happened for the people.